triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

FW: Vacuum?

To: "'triumph list'" <triumphs@Autox.Team.Net>
Subject: FW: Vacuum?
From: "Kohout, Robert" <kohout@jbc.js.mil>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:42:25 -0400
Triumphs.  Work.   These are two words that I have rarely heard used
together in a sentence without the words 'does not' in front of the word
work.  ;)

Robert Kohout
72 TR6


> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Mr. Mike" Passaretti [SMTP:passaretti@sol.med.ge.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 1997 11:07 AM
> To:   Barry Schwartz
> Cc:   triumphs@autox.team.net
> Subject:      Vacuum?
> 
> 
> >>>>> "Barry" == Barry Schwartz <bschwartz@encad.com> writes:
> 
>     Barry> Sorry, with all the talk about vacuum and boosters
>     Barry> I just have to clarify something.  Vacuum, in this
>     Barry> case is the absence (or relative difference) = of
>     Barry> atmospheric pressure or 'air'.  The air PRESSURE on
>     Barry> the other side of the diaphragm, opposite of the
>     Barry> lower pressure or 'vacuum' side is what actual= ly
>     Barry> does any work, not the vacuum 'sucking'.
> 
> Sure, now you're going to tell me it's the holes that do the
> work, not the electrons.
>                                               -MM
> 
> (Who still believes that torch batterys run out because
>  they've absorbed too much dark)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>